RowdyRedRam

I'm a little skeptical of the claims that due process was followed through as the Hondurans are now suggesting. While it is clearly possible that we simply don't know that much, I can tell you from an interveiw I heard from the Honduran ambassador who is appearently supporting the coup now that he really didn't know what going on until it happened but now is claiming it was legal. I mean really ask yourself, if he simply broke the law why did they need to bust in his house in the middle of the night and drop him off in the next country in his pajamas. I would need some substancial evidence to actually believe this is anything more than a strong armed power grab.

He said this

Why would he need to wait to denounce a military takeover???? Even if the majority of Hondurans are ok with this (which is what I'm hearing), it only encourages the power of force over the power of law in an area where this has historically been a problem. The Honduran president could have been ousted legally. What possible reason can you give for making the accusation that Obama like strong arm rule?

I'm no Kragthorpe apologist, but I'm curious as to where you veiw the blame here? Do you believe he is lying about his secretary not telling them he would come, or do you simply think it was "lowball" to throw her under the bus. If the latter is true how do you think he should have handled it? I'm simply curious.

The point is very clear. Christianity has a very clear stance on the issue of whether people deserve help. I'm not saying it is UnAmerican not to assist the poor, but you better be able to convince St Peter when time comes around.

"Love your neighbor as yourself" I think someone important said this, but what do I know.

They are liberal in the sense that they used government forces to attempt to fix the economy. The conservative plan of Hoovers was do nothing and let the market fix itself, at the time things only got worse. There is a current notion that had nothing been done the economy would have recovered quicker, but I find this assumption highly politically motivated. The point of NIRA was to stop wages from falling out of the sky. I don't disagree with the argument that this might have been counterproductive, but we can not foresee the effect of how the serious drop in wages would have furthered the problems. The point was to control prices and keep farmers profitable. While your framing it as FDR dancing around a campfire of produce while people are starving the intent was to ensure the farmer didn't leave the industry. If all of that food was given away you would be seriously jeopardizing the free market by flooding it with free goods. You have to remember that there was a major depression going on at the time and they were going to try anything to fix it. Food prices are still controlled and fixed today not by the same extremes but they still are. The Japanese internment camps are a serious blight on our human rights record. While I don't forgive these actions we can't ignore that racial attitudes and fears of the day took the lead role in this. You are right in that this was not liberal, and was in so many ways wrong but this was a war issue, not a political one. Yes packing the supreme court was wrong. But it was accepted by the masses under the situation that they were in i.e. desperate. Our system of government works to "muck up" quick changes. We were at the time in need of quick and drastic changes. FDR was not the first president to go outside the lines of the Constitution. How does the Louisiana Purchase or the Emancipation Proclamation fit in the guidelines of the Constitution? The Constitution as it exists may be to simple and to undefined to adequately meet the needs of the modern day state if held strictly to its words. It is very arguable that it is because of its lack of clarity and simpleness that government has been able to evolve under it and make changes to meet our needs as history has moved on. But I again have to return to my original argument that the US, under the framework developed in FDR changes, soared higher in prominence than it ever had before. We today are the greatest nation in the world and much of our government works under principals and programs from that era. If his presidency was such a dramatic failure how could this possibly be the case? FDR guided the country through some of the most difficult times the nation faced, and we came out of it stronger, more productive, and more powerful.

Congrats Crimsons! While I don't think it means anything for the season it is still nice to win.

FDR was a liberal, many concepts and programs he pushed (and I do agree that much of this was done so on a less than constitutional standards) have formed much of the basis for modern liberal thinking. For this reason his legacy is a target. It is not to say that any specifics given by cch5432 are wrong, but one can not ignore A.The shape he left the country in. B. His guidance through WWII C. His popularity. The US rose to become the most powerful country in the world under the parameters that FDR left the government, which were quite revolutionary compared to the prior government. If he did the country so wrong how were they able to blossom under this new significantly more socialist, government? Simply because he is a hero of the left doesn't negate his great legacy. A reverse argument of the legacy of Reagan can be made for some of our current problems but it to would be a false representation of the total value and importance of his presidency.

Bigdawg I see little comparison to Male of the last few years to Male of the mid 90's and early 2000's. The talent of those years was significantly superior than what Male has had the last few. Hard not to view that as Male turning in the wrong direction.

This type of occurrence is what most bothers me about unions. Now I do understand the reasoning behind there actions, they see themselves as advocates of ALL employees no matter what. I however am of the belief that if they were to take a more Spock like approach (the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few) they would much better serve most workers and benefit the company as well. Now I clearly support the existence of unions, but I think this policy to protect bad workers is a major error and is cause of much dismay even among many/most union members.

But someone still has to bring up the issues. Most often this issues are never even brought to light until an employee has been fired or laid off, because they in most cases, people don't want to make waves, especially as individuals.

Unions provide a leverage of power to workers who would otherwise not have any. I'm not going to defend all union actions, because many are indefensible in my opinion, but they do still have a need. This assumption that worker exploitation no longer exist is naive if not silly, and to remove unions would remove a very strong check on the power of large employers. The fact is that unions have done a large part in our history to bring workers out of the "working poor" category. Remove them and I see just about all nonskilled labor returning to working poor status. The dependence on laws to protect employees alone is not really feasible. Nearly every employer will have access to stronger legal counsel than workers and the simply concern over employer retribution will prevent nearly all but the most egregious actions from being challenged. I'm not completely opposed to the idea of open shop, but I do see where it could be used to isolate and punish union members so as to reduce the membership. Again it is all about power, I believe to much power on either side causes problems. Even as a former employer (actually especially as a former employer) I see a great deal of problems giving employers complete power in the employee worker relationship, which is really what this is all about.

I didn't say it was unreasonable to expect good service, I said there were things you could do to help yourself, I never said your particular place wasn't horrible. If it is horrible you should stop going there. Wendy's reliably has the worst order accuracy in the industry, however they also have the fastest speed in the industry (the two are most likely related)

I ran a fast food restaurant for a few years so I will offer steps to help improve the order accuracy you receive. Most issues arise from communication, either they didn't hear you correctly, they weren't paying attention, or just maybe you forgot to order it. To fix this A. Speak clearly and into the speaker. If you turn your head away while speaking they may not hear you. B. Don't mumble or speak considerably fast, especially if you have a thick accent C. Use the menu names. Calling items by names other then what they are often results in mistakes, because many items are similar in many respects and you don't want the cashier to decide which one you meant. D. Always Always Always have your order repeated back to you and don't drive up until you are certain they said everything that you ordered, this requires you remembering what you ordered. I'm not saying that the particular restaurant shouldn't be doing better but by taking those steps you help yourself on your end. Factors that cause mistakes 1. Large orders: The larger your order the higher probability for a mistake. It is much easier to handle 10 small orders than one order serving 10 people. 2. Special orders: Communication again is a very big key in this issue. Something to keep in mind is that everything you say to one person(cashier) then has to get communicated to another person (cook) either by hardwired computer or by voice. It is a lot like playing the telephone game where things get twisted around as they go. Another factor with special orders is that they often require more attention and in the process of making your well done double cheese with bacon, onion, pickles, 1/2 the normal amount of mustard, and mayo they may lose some focus on your other regular items like fries. 3. If they are really busy. Personally I NEVER go to a fastfood restaurant if I see they are busy. To many people to people transactions going on at such a fast pace is bound to create mistakes. The more you combine any of those 3 circumstances the higher probability that something will go wrong. The more large orders with special items the higher likelihood something will be wrong. The last thing that you can do to help prevent yourself from getting messed up orders is to check your order before you leave. If something is still wrong, remember honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Using the biggest smile possible say "I'm sorry I think you forgot my ______." Or "My order is slightly incorrect you you mind fixing it for me" be nice cheerful and friendly with your request and you will almost never have any issues with getting your order repaired. However going in with clinched teeth, furrowed brow, and an angry disposition will in most cases make whoever your going to yell at feel defensive and probably fight with you. Again I'm not defending bad service, of which there is a great amount out there. I'm simply offering the most effective things you can do to limit problems. And something else to consider is if "everyone" always messes up your order, just maybe "everyone" isn't really the problem...

Congrats on the honor Highlands. I do think Highlands may have had a superior team in the 98 season where they squashed an outstanding Male team (preseason or first game I don't remember). Outside of that I would stand with the arguement that X and T have had better teams. There will be a good barometer as Highlands plays Manual who gets both X and T this season.

Their military consist of over 1 million soldiers making it one of the largest in the world. Add in nuclear devices and I wouldn't discount this threat by any means

(Louisville area) Fisherville (grew up) Fern Creek Hikes Point Clifton Kennesaw GA (ATL suburb)

Because a strong middle class is more important to maintain than growing the wealth gap. A large and vibrant middleclass provides a much bigger consumer base than a large poor and small rich population. A rich person in spite of the amount he/she spends on items only needs so many cars washing machines dishes and clothes and so on. Having more people with the means to make purchases is better for the overall economy than just a few people having a lot of money. Additionally the UAW only plays one factor in the auto problem, it just so happens that this factor becomes "the" issue due to the political nature of unions.

The more I think about it the more I've come to accept your assumption as correct. Your right I'm wrong. My initial thinking was that Israel allows us a military pathway/jump point/ally in terms of protecting "our" oil reasources of the Middle East. In otherwords Isreal allows us a to have a gun at the party should we need it. Were Israel to be destroyed we would be completely gunless in that area, therefore we have needed to protect Israel as an entity. I do believe that this thinking has played a part in the past however I don't know that it is any longer relevent. And being it isn't really relevant today anyway, it probably already would have effected our policy with Israel if that were the case. So again I will concede to your arguement on that point.

There are far better arguements for anti Obamaist than this. It is so "dumbed" I would have thought it a fake and a sarcasm if I had not been told otherwise.

It boggles my mind how some people twist things. Listen all you right wing, oil slurping, tree killing, this is my world so I can do what ever I want with it while I'm alive be darned its effects to the next generation people on here. (Just kidding.... sort of) GETTING OFF OIL IS GOOD. Getting off oil means moving away from our international relationships with disreputable nations of the Middle East. It means no longer having to prop up near dictator like heads of state in order to ensure stability. It means less of our money gets funneled to those we currently find our most immediate enemies (Islamic Terrorists). It means we don't have to care about Israel at all. Now of course the implementation of this specific plan won't accomplish any of this. But it does continue us on a path to reduce our foreign oil dependence, which in my opinion is a major national security issue. Oh and it also helps the environment.

For what it is worth, this is true almost across the board in the restaurant industry. Most illegal immigrant have false papers, and many if not most employers don't bother checking them, even the big boys like McDonald's.

Cantaneros (sp?) off Hikes Lane in the Klondike shopping Center. There is one set up in a grocery store in Buechel, and there is one on Shepardsville road near Outer Loop. The Buechel area is full of hole in the wall ethnic eateries, if you like Middle Eastern Food, Al Watan's (located right across the street from Cantaneros) is very reasonable and has outstanding pita bread. The Falfal sandwich is a must try there.